Originally posted by The Ellimist
Only ruler of the world? Do you have any idea who I am? I am he who knows all. Look up my username.
Except you are 18 and dont know about much of anything, you prolly have never voted in your life. You prolly never been in a court room, sat on a jury or grand jury, And now you are the expert on politics, military, law and everything else cause you watch CNN and read Huff post👆
You have yet to have any high level political discussion, its only a smug act. The only discussion you have is Bane vs Anakin, and most of those threads get closed.
Have you taken a single political class, and when did you become so smart in politics, considering your young age, I have a hard time believing you know really anything about politics. What political classes have you taken, what books have you read that would even lead me to believe you have any basic understanding of geo political economics or gerrymandering in districts.
What do you know about biennial sessions of congress, and who that affects, what do you know about sine die? Or extraordinary sessions or special sessions? What is a council manager form, or extraterritorial jurisdiction?
Quick, google all of it so you look half way smart, and not just completely embarrassed.
And no, you have not worked for anyone at 18 other then sonic and burger king.
I swear, he and I have gone back and forth over this stuff alot over the years, since he was like, 12. I've actually said more or less what you did about his age:arrogance ratio. I know you and I are on opposite ends of the spectrum but it's neat how we've said pretty much the same thing independently at different times about the same kid.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
You have yet to have any high level political discussion, its only a smug act. The only discussion you have is Bane vs Anakin, and most of those threads get closed.Have you taken a single political class, and when did you become so smart in politics, considering your young age, I have a hard time believing you know really anything about politics. What political classes have you taken, what books have you read that would even lead me to believe you have any basic understanding of geo political economics or gerrymandering in districts.
What do you know about biennial sessions of congress, and who that affects, what do you know about sine die? Or extraordinary sessions or special sessions? What is a council manager form, or extraterritorial jurisdiction?
Quick, google all of it so you look half way smart, and not just completely embarrassed.
And no, you have not worked for anyone at 18 other then sonic and burger king.
I don't think you get it.
Whether or not I know very much about politics (as a formerly nationally ranked competitive debater), you're so mentally inept that I don't need to - you just make so many elementary logical fallacies and cognitive gaffes in everything you say that its stupidity opens on itself.
Case in point: you continued to insist that Trump had won the first debate in the court of public opinion by citing a bunch of online polls that let people vote as many times as they wanted. Then I presented you with actual, scientific polls - and you just couldn't wrap your head on why they were better. The basic tenants of the scientific method were literally too complex for you to understand.
Since you continue to act like a prick, why don't I show everyone your history paper? I mean, you're a political science major, English is your first language, and you denied to say that you have any sort of dyslexia or related condition, and yet here is an actual, university paper you claimed to have written:
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Essay on Doctrine of Discovery.Doctrine of Discovery or ‘DoD’ is the concept of how new land was discovered in the early 1600-1800’s, it is how land was apportioned and what rights of that land went to who and how in the New World.
When land was discovered, Doctrine of Discovery was used to apportion land to the which person, or nation made the claim to the land. When challenges to land were made, DoD was used to determine who had the rights to land. Because the new world indigenous people were not Christian, they had no rights to the land. As with anything in life, first discovery is sort of like finders keepers in today’s life. The first person to discover the land is the owner. The discoverer gained property rights and all rights associated with that land. In order for first discovery to be legal and lawful was the first nation that discovered it had to occupy and possess the land. The nation of first discovery also had the right of preemption which prevented other European nations to purchase the land.
4 more paragraphs to go.
This is honestly one of the worst productions of the human language I have ever seen. It's just awful.
Now, I don't know why you keep saying that I'm eighteen. But I am in college; and I do have some credentials that would blow yours completely out of the water. I'm a much bigger name in my field than you are in yours, I'll tell you that. Let me tell you a little secret: your experience doesn't mean shit outside of how it actually makes you better. You may have a decent amount of years of experience in intaking oxygen, but it isn't apparent to anyone here what else you bring to the table.
But go on believing otherwise. 👆
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I swear, he and I have gone back and forth over this stuff alot over the years, since he was like, 12. I've actually said more or less what you did about his age:arrogance ratio. I know you and I are on opposite ends of the spectrum but it's neat how we've said pretty much the same thing independently at different times about the same kid.
Is it arrogance if it's true? 🙂
Hewhoknowsall👆😂
Thanks for proving my point, you literally know jack shit about anything. I see nothing wrong with that thesis, I really don't care if you don't like it. You are not a teacher or a professor.
You can keep referencing my rough draft of one paragraph that I typed up in 2 minutes, but it does not prove anything. Its called a rough draft, getting ideas on paper, what would you know about that?
Good dodge on the rest👆
Go ahead and explain how those "scientific polls" were taken since you seem to know what they are.
Also a person winning or losing is personal opinion, not based on "science"
I thought I was Dolos. 🙄
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I see nothing wrong with that thesis,
Wow, you are completely f*cking delusional.
In either case, your reply is the perfect example: you didn't actually respond to anything that I said. Because you can't. EDIT: wow, as usual, you then make some meager edits to your post. 👆
And no, I'm not impressed that you could memorize some terms in your political science classes, while clearly failing to actually understand anything, as evidenced by the drivel with which you've been spamming these forums. I could do your masters in my sleep. Could you skip all but three classes in partial differential equations and then earn the highest grade on the exam that the professor had ever seen? No? Interesting.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Yup. It's still arrogance even if it's untrue, you're oblivious to the fact, and you think that eloquence and vocabulary hides your ostentatious vainglory.
I don't see how I'm oblivious; I don't deny that I'm arrogant on internet forums, just like how you presumably don't deny that you're a rhetorical smart*ss. The ethical difference is pretty null. 👆